Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Luxury Performance Sedans

1496498500501502

Comments

  • james27james27 Posts: 433
    My biggest gripe with (almost) all luxury vehicles is that with my long torso, to get a comfortable position, I'm either having to crawl around the door pillar (on MB) to get out, or stuffing my head into the mandatory sunroof. While a few of the brands have occasionally allowed you to order one without the sunroof, lately that generally isn't the case. It's distressing when looking in their (German) home market, reviewing the available headroom, and find that that is without the sunroof, and the US (or anywhere) version with a sunroof has anywhere from 2.5-4" less headroom! All for something I personally don't use, don't want, and definately could use the extra room. I had an A6 a long time ago that I was able to special order without the sunroof, and it had (per the manufacturer's specs) 2.85" more headroom for the driver than one with the sunroof. That was a pleasure...I could actually get the seat up off the floor and move it around on a trip. Sitting, I'm a bit over 38" when sitting to the top of my skull, not counting hair. The headroom on the last MB E-series in the US had less than 38" of headroom. Without a sunroof, it was like 41". Can't get them here. BMW, similar, Audi, similar. I ended up with a BMW GT, mostly because it had enough headroom, not because it was the one I wanted. Decent car, but I'm not a great fan of RFT, which most (all?) BMWs come with these days, and no place for a compact or conventional spare. They're okay, just not great.
  • abacomikeabacomike South FloridaPosts: 3,132
    Great point! Moon/sunroofs were optional for many years and then manufacturers thought they were doing us a favor making them standard. You are correct - headroom is tight in the Benz. Nor only that, I only use the moonroof only 10 - 20 times a year. Too hot here in Florida and sun too strong most months. Why not make them optional and make leather standard?

    2014 Mercedes Benz CLS 550 - best car ever! 2nd best car ever, my 1967 Corvette Stingray Coupe with 435 hp.

  • james27james27 Posts: 433
    Last I looked at the MB, I had the dealer make a plea to corporate, but no joy. He told me that when it was optional, people would complain that it was standard on other brands they were looking at and said, why should we have to pay extra for it? To satisfy the typical lazy US consumer, they just relented. There is some economy of scale to just build them all the same, but my point is that they already build them without...it's not a big deal, especially with the computerized JIT manufacturing process that is pretty much universal with the manufacturers these days. FWIW, that 'standard' sunroof in my GT is a 1700 Euro option in Germany! I'd much rather spend that money on something else! So much for 'free' - people, it isn't free, compare apples to apples and you'd see.
  • abacomikeabacomike South FloridaPosts: 3,132
    If you look at the consumer ratings here on Edmunds and other sites, a common thread that is frequently mentioned is the lack of standard leather. For a luxury brand, one would think that US marketing tests would have brought this to the attention of corporate (limited head room and leather). As lawcar mentioned in one of these forums, power retractable side mirrors are standard on many luxury brands - but not Mercedes. Interesting, to say the least

    2014 Mercedes Benz CLS 550 - best car ever! 2nd best car ever, my 1967 Corvette Stingray Coupe with 435 hp.

  • james27james27 Posts: 433
    Blame the marketing department...it's not the engineers that come up with all the things.
  • abacomikeabacomike South FloridaPosts: 3,132
    Market analysts find out perceived consumer desires, wants and or Preferences and then engineering and designers create solutions. At least that has been the usual flow of ideas and advances. I guess engineering and designers can "create" and then marketing can "sell", but meeting needs seems to
    Be more logical.

    2014 Mercedes Benz CLS 550 - best car ever! 2nd best car ever, my 1967 Corvette Stingray Coupe with 435 hp.

  • A reporter is working on a story about car technology and is looking for recent or current car shoppers for whom technology was a critical factor. Were you looking to pack your car with as much new technology as possible? Are there special technologies and systems that you care about more than others? And are you at all concerned about the role technology plays with distracted driving? Please send an email with contact information and a brief description of your experience by no later than Sunday, February 5, 2012.

    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • carolinabobcarolinabob Posts: 495
    The problem with MB and most European cars is that quality, reliability and dependability are far too inconsistent. This is especially so when you consider how long they have been in the business and how much they charge for the cars. The BEST German cars only rate an average on reliability and very few of them.
    In truth, MB probably never has been the reliability/dependability icon it is supposed to be. Their maintenance plans also call for replacement of many parts every 24,000 miles that other manufacturers expect to last 100,000 miles or more.
    Within 5,000 miles my 2010 E350 was recalled, the tilt component of steering wheel had to be replaced (2.5 days! after part came in), leather on $850 optional steering wheel shredded, etc.

    As for Chrysler fiasco, it could have worked but MB management in Germany tried to run the company to supplement MB products and make money for DAG. Sent Germans over here to run it. Fiat is letting the American automobile professionals run the company with input, assistance, money and products that complement Chrysler.

    BTW, a major factor in why people buy Lexus, BMW, MB, Audi, etc. is for the badge/name. They may deny it, but's its true. No star on front and back of my car and I would not have purchased it. Same thing for Lexus, Audi, Acura and Infinitis that I looked at.
  • We bought a 2008 RL used in March 2011 with 18,700 miles on it from an Acura dealer in Tucson, AZ for $26,000. It was not certified - we got an extended warranty. We have had it over a year and it is a GREAT car. Bought it after our son bought a used '05 with 28K on it in January 2010. We were so impressed - the AWD, sound system, Navi, back up camera, power rear window shade(great if you have little ones in car seats - especially backward facing ones), adaptive xenon headhlights, etc etc. - there is nothing missing on this car in terms of luxury. Performance? My husband had a guy in a Dodge Hemi Pick Up challenge him at about 35MPH. The Acura blew his doors off - the VTEC kicked in and the guy's jaw dropped! LOL! This car is no performance slouch - and we get 29-30 MPG at 75-80 on long trips. Styling?? Look at a 2005 - a 7 YEAR OLD CAR - and then look at a 2012 ES350 or a Hyundai Genesis - see any resemblance?? I do not understand maligning the RL. IT IS A GREAT CAR. Looked at a BMW 5 series lately? 4 cylinder engine standard??? Pulllease. We have had 3 1st Series Legends, a '94 6 speed Coupe, then a couple of Accords(kids were in college) and now back to Acura. The legends all went 175K plus without any drivetrain problems whatsoever. This car is the Legend all over again - but better in SO many ways. Buy one - you'll love it!
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 16,897
    I don't like to do this normally, but since you brought it up...

    Racing a pickup truck? Really??

    TL SH-AWD 0-60 = 6.4s; 1/4-mile = 14.9s; mileage = 16/24
    4-cyl 528i 0-60 = 6.0s; 1/4-mile = ?; mileage 20/30

    The 528i is still estimated, but the reality won't be far off. Clearly, the 4-cyl is not a hindrance if you want to compare to the Acura.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '08 Town&Country

  • michael0137michael0137 Posts: 58
    edited July 2012
    I am Michael's wife posting under his account - so don't anyone get confused when I said "my husband"! :P It was a bit juvenile, but hey it was a recently new Dodge HEMI V8 - 0-60 in 6.8 according to road tests.

    As for the BMW?? I don't care WHAT they do to the engine with turbo charging - it is a 4 banger. Acura has been constantly criticized for having a V6 versus a V8 - standard - and now BMW has a twin turbocharged 4??? Why aren't they being destroyed in the press? Advertising $$$$$$$ - that's why.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 16,897
    As for the BMW?? I don't care WHAT they do to the engine with turbo charging - it is a 4 banger. Acura has been constantly criticized for having a V6 versus a V8 - standard - and now BMW has a twin turbocharged 4??? Why aren't they being destroyed in the press? Advertising $$$$$$$ - that's why.

    That's not completely true. Acura has been criticized for not having a V8 as an option. All the competitors had 6-cyls in the base models, so that was never a criticism toward Acura.

    In other words, the competitors had optional models that were significantly faster than the Acura. So someone wanting more power had to look elsewhere. It has definitely cost them those sales.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '08 Town&Country

  • houdini1houdini1 Kansas City areaPosts: 5,778
    Does BMW have 6-cyl options for the 3 and 5 series? I have just never liked 4 cyl engines, turbo or not, especially in upscale cars. Just too harsh and rough at idle and at start up.

    Love the BMW 6 cyl. I think BMW is making a mistake. Also interesting to note that Acura is doing the opposite in their RDX by going from a turbo 4 to a 6 cyl.

    Maybe BMW is trying to meet mpg goals?

    2013 LX 570 2010 LS 460

  • ghstudioghstudio Posts: 920
    You might want to test drive a lotus....makes you think about 4 cylinder cars a bit differently :)
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 16,897
    Maybe BMW is trying to meet mpg goals?

    Oh, absolutely. That's why everyone is scaling down and adding turbos.

    Interestingly, I don't find my twin-turbo BMW I6 to be any smoother than my VW 2.0T was.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '08 Town&Country

  • james27james27 Posts: 433
    Certainly...BMW makes both 6 and 8-cylinder versions of the 5-series, as well as the 3 and 7 series. So, you get to determine the amount of power you want available. But, with the turbocharger making so much torque at low RPM's (and it is torque that gets you moving), it makes most of the other engines look like porkers off the line. The BMW make max torque at around 1200rpm. Do you know where the Acura needs to turn to achieve its max torque? That's what allows it to go up a hill without downshifting, not Hp. That's what allows it to accellerate at low rpm, not Hp. And, with all that torque, it can cruise at really low rpm, saving fuel and lowering noise. How fast is your engine turning at 80mph? The BMW (6) turns less than 2K. That saves wear and tear and makes for a much more comfortable cruise.
  • rayainswrayainsw Posts: 2,476
    'now BMW has a twin turbocharged 4??? '
    Actually the new BMW 4 has a single 'twin-scroll' turbo charger.
    'At 240 bhp, the 528i’s 2.0-liter inline-4 with a twin-scroll turbo'
    - from R&T
    http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/drives/2012-bmw-528i
    - Ray
    Odd wording....
  • houdini1houdini1 Kansas City areaPosts: 5,778
    How about the non turbo in-line 6? Has it gone away?

    2013 LX 570 2010 LS 460

  • james27james27 Posts: 433
    I think so, but not sure (at least in the USA). The EPA rules require some significant fleet fuel economy increases, and smaller is better. But to retain the same power, turbochargers are being added. The new 4 has more power AND torque than the I-6 it replaces and gets significantly better mileage. Things will continue to get tighter and tighter, and you'll see more tweaks to improve economy whether we like it or not.

    Many of the engines have what they call twin-scroll turbo, but it is just one turbo (while some models do have multiple actual turbochargers). There's a valve that adjusts to bring the turbo up to speed quicker so it can add power at much lower engine rpm than a typical single unit. This is less complicated than using multiple real turbos where often, one was smaller to get up to speed quicker, but the other one was larger to provide max boost at higher engine speeds. The timing on that type is messier, and you can have a hole in the middle of the power band. Things are much more linear with the twin-scroll design.
  • txscotxsco Posts: 4
    If this needs to be a separate thread, just let me know. Currently own a 2011 MB E350; I like the car very much, but would like to have a bit more power. Have a chance to purchase a 2011 E63; I've read everyting I can on this vehicle, taken a test drive, etc, but was seeking some advice from owners. It's a lot more money-is it worth it? I really liked the car, but any and all advice is appreciated.
Sign In or Register to comment.